Bikes belong on sidewalks not the road.
If cars are required to be registered, taxed to death for road taxes, licenses, and other garbage etc. and bicycles are not, then bicycles do not belong on the roads. |
This right here, but unfortunately people on here will argue with you ad nauseam... these are the same people that support taking out 1/3 of lanes in a major traffic area to accommodate 20 to 30 bikes per day. |
This is some really silly rationale. Its not a little inconvenience, its hours per week. Forcing people to do what you want because you don't agree with what they want is exactly why the other side wins - no one like to be told what to do. |
Roads are paid for with general taxes - all of ours, not just drivers. And you need to be licensed and insured while driving because of the extreme damage you can do. You pay for parking because you take up a sizeable amount of space to do so. Perhaps you don't belong on the road. I can just picture you running after little Timmy with his training wheels on, shouting at him about registration requirements. |
You're the people arguing for "just one more lane" to alleviate traffic. Like some kind of junkie. |
None of what you said makes any sense whatsoever. Start requiring licenses, insurance, registration fees, inspection fees, taxes for food to fuel the peddling, extra taxes for electricity if using an Ebike, etc. for bicycles if you want them on the road. ![]() OR stop doing all those gov taxes, etc. on automobiles, gasoline, home owners, etc., then everyone can share the roads. ![]() ![]() |
DP but roads need to become "static" and NO MORE EXPANSIONS. There are plenty of roads. If a city becomes congested, then people will quit moving to it if they are stuck in traffic for hours each day. Everyone quit playing musical chairs and stick to an area. |
This doesn't seem to be working it's not killing enough drivers. |
Completely delusional posters. How are a bunch of motorists being delayed a couple of minutes good for the environment? How are bike lanes in the road actually safer? |
Why would we want to make it easier for more cars? We have too many and there’s too much traffic. Even with bike lanes, cars get 98 percent of the infrastructure (and that’s generous to bikes)… sharing a little and maybe encouraging you to think of other ways to get around is the point and it’s not unreasonable. |
I was riding my bike along river road and I saw like three cars - time we shut it down and turn it over to bikes? I can’t think of a reason not to. |
Crybaby pedestrians disagree. Cars have lots of room, share it. |
Bikes don’t need to be inspected for emissions because they don’t emit anything. My electric car also is exempt from D.C. inspections for the same reason. As for the other taxes and fees, I also pay gas taxes (when I put gas in our gas car) and property taxes for the home I own. Am I allowed to ride a bike now? |
I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.
It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited. And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now. Loopholes like this need to be closed. |
You can be ticketed without having a bike registration. Want enforcement, ask for enforcement. |